User blog comment:Cpt Crimson/DmC sales way lower than dmc4's/@comment-2068382-20130207064908/@comment-134861-20130301165127

No, I don't need more examples of strawmen. If no one here is even making that argument, why are you obsessing about it?

The Ophion is the same as the Devil Bringer, it just doesn't allow you to use guns at the same time, can't work unless the target is in camera, and for platforming, won't work unless you're in a specific area. It is objectively inferior.

Limbo is essentially the same thing we've been getting since DMC1, except that there's no other type of setting (no forest, castle, etc.), and the platforming is more dynamic. Small improvement in dynamacy, overall demotion in actual variation. Furthermore, the total lack of backtracking, despite repetitive and emotionless environments, combined with the total removal of any kind of "exploration" story (no examining stuff to get the feeling that, yes, people lived here) makes Limbo come off as...just being there as an obstacle, not as a setting.

The color-coded monsters bit is objectively inferior to past games, and is antithetical to the point of the genre. For one, it cripples the whole "freedom to create innovative combos" that the series is defined by, and that this very game tries to claim is the point. For two, past games had versions of it that worked, as does the Witch in this game: having a coded barrier that once broken allows more freedom. For three, if the weapon codess weren't so painfully restricted (blue is weak, red is slow), it wouldn't be so boring to have to deal with the color-coded enemies anyway. Finally, your complaint about Agni and Rudra is nonsensical - friendly fire has existed in each game, including DmC, where even Dante can be hurt with his own weapons.

...if you prefer a lack of freedom to having to think out a stylish combo, well, this game itself will tell you you're playing the wrong series.

As for backtracking, DMC4 did it poorly, but at the very least the use throughout the games allowed the player to form an emotional attachment and familiarity with a location, while also depicting the incontrivertable effects of whatever demonic force was perverting the landscape. DmC has only that demonic force, but takes away the emotional attachment by just having Dante rush from location to location...even the Order HQ isn't "oh, we're back here, I need to use my familiarity to save my friends", it was just normal platforming with the added benefit of seeing your friends die.

As for letting the player see the action...that complaint makes no sense to me. All other DMCs let the player do virtually any crazy thing the character did in cutscenes. If you mean, not slogging the game down with cutscenes? Absolutely false. DmC does intermittent cutscenes even more frequently than the other games (multiple times during battles, even), and it's cutscene-skipping mechanism is completely broken, often not letting you skip a scene at all while it still loads extremely slowly.

DMC4 had a relatively cliche story compared to DMC3, but still streamlined mechanics, added some new ones like Devil Bringer, and sold better than DmC. DmC is, overall, a reskin of DMC4 with an extra helping of objectable story/characters/setting (which is somewhat less objective), alongside a very quantifiable and objective failure in game programming, like awful bugs, awful graphics engine, poor control design, unoriginal combos, and a broken difficulty system.

I don't understand why you're talking about me "guessing about the state of the community", since...I didn't mention it. You're claiming that those objecting to DmC are just "classic series fanboys who hate anything different than the first four games", I'm saying "bullshit, they have specific critiques of specific, inarguable faults, and they're perfectly willing to criticize games in the classic series that don't live up to the legacy as well". Your claim, especially the "Call of Devil May Cryfare" nonsense is full of shit, and I am really rather tired of the strawmen and ad hominems. If you can't address the actual points being brought up, be silent.

"Was better before! One would wish those were trolls.... " ...or, you could actually examine their complaints, which are often pointing out stuff like, hey, this game has a crapton of bugs, lazy bosses, extreme easiness, graphics errors, and has worse graphic specs than the past games, and can be quantifiably and inarguably shown to be inferior in many respects.

Finally: NT may be a new developer for this series, it is not a new developer overall. Gamers are perfectly familiar with NT's output, and are well equipped to say "no, we don't want that kind of gameplay, it's inferior." I'm not personally saying that, but the whole acting like NT is a freshman underdog who just needs to be given that opportunity to show what it can do is false. As for the "nobody had the idea to show Dante before DMC3"...yes, yes they did. It's called "DMC1 and DMC3 pretty succinctly explained what was going on in Dante's past" and "we have multiple novels and manga covering the backstory". This is another claim where you are completely making things up contrary to reality. (If you meant a game specifically, the answer is that according to canon, the logical backstory was more drama based than action based, and wouldn't have really been fit for a DMC game).